Marcel Rojahn, Edzard Weber, Norbert Gronau

• Terminology is a critical instrument for each researcher. Different terminologies for the same research object may arise in different research communities. By this inconsistency, many synergistic effects get lost. Theories and models will be more understandable and reusable if a common terminology is applied. This paper examines the terminological (in)consistence for the research field of job-shop scheduling by a literature review. There is an enormous variety in the choice of terms and mathematical notation for the same concept. The comparability, reusability and combinability of scheduling methods is unnecessarily hampered by the arbitrary use of homonyms and synonyms. The acceptance in the community of used variables and notation forms is shown by means of a compliance quotient. This is proven by the evaluation of 240 scientific publications on planning methods.